Home / Articles / Myth of Obama’s world sans nuclear weapon–Global Zero

Myth of Obama’s world sans nuclear weapon–Global Zero

Prague speech, on April 05 2009, was the first off the rails articulation by President Obama after assumption of presidency: “First, the United States will take concrete steps towards a world without nuclear weapons… we will reduce the role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy … we will negotiate a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with the Russians…my administration will immediately and aggressively pursue US ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)… the United States will seek a new treaty that verifiably ends the production of fissile materials… we will strengthen the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty…” Peace loving people all over the World were pleasantly surprised. They thought the promised Messiah has become, realists scorned it off, asserting that he would become a ‘normal American President’, rather soon.  It is interesting to explore the viability about myth of Obama’s world sans nuclear weapons—Global Zero.

His Prague comments had add refreshing music to ears:  “And as nuclear power –-as the only nuclear power to have used a nuclear weapon, the United States has a moral responsibility to act…I state clearly and with conviction America’s commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons”. … Countries with nuclear weapons will move towards disarmament, countries without nuclear weapons will not acquire them, and all countries can access peaceful nuclear energy.”

It appeared as if Obama was reading from the long forgotten “old testament”—the NPT. Russians went along and signed START III, counties from all over the world flocked to join the Nuclear Security Summit (NSS) process.

Countdown of Obama’s White House days has begun, so he is making a last ditch effort to leave behind a legacy. global-zeroAnd as there is none, he is trying to manufacture one on nuclear turf,  by pushing through a UNSC resolution in support of CTBT; which the US is yet to ratify. His whole gambit of Global Zero had been a double speak. Practically, he helped nuclear proliferation in many ways. He allocated over a trillion dollar for a phased upgrade of American nuclear weapon programme; scuttled Fissile Material Treaty by not accepting to account-for existing stocks: under the garb of Nuclear Security Summit process, he advocated that NSS members transfer their surplus fissile materials to the US for safe keeping—some stooges complied; persistently kept appeasing India to strengthen Indo-US Agreement 123—an icon of horizontal proliferation etc.  It added to Indian arrogance leading to its walking away from arms control and arms reduction talks with Pakistan. India has also not agreed to Pakistan’s latest proposal of converting their respective unilateral voluntary moratoria on nuclear testing into a formal bilateral arrangement.

And what he did to de-operationalized nuclear warheads under START III, instead of destroying them, Obama ordered their safe storage from where they could be operationalized on short notice. Frustrated with Obama’s duplicity, Russians walked away from the NSS process, and did not move beyond Start III.

While castigating Iranian and North Korean nuclear programmes, Obama slammed biting sanctions against the two. At the same time he chose to close his eyes on a nuclear city coming up close to Southern India’s village Challekere, for setting-up a thermonuclear weapons factory. He also chose to keep mum on 200 Israeli nuclear war heads, all targeted on Tehran.  Despite repeated recommendations by the NPT review conferences, he took no practical steps for setting up a WMD free zone in the Middle East.

Obama wants to ensure Indian entry to Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) through backdoor—country specific waiver— before he leaves White House, special plenary of NSG is likely to meet in Geneva before Obama leaves presidency. On the eve of earlier plenary Obama had made personal effort to gate crash India into NSG; Secretary of State John Kerry had written a letter to member states to let India in by setting aside the laid down criteria. However it did not work. America is also desperate in getting India into other strategic trade regimes, Indian has already parachuted into Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), despite the fact that its strategic export control regimes are not in compliance with MTCR and other regimes.

India submitted its application for membership of the NSG on May 12. Pakistan did the same on May 19. China and at least seven other countries blocked the consensus. China took the principled stand that entry to NSG should be through a criteria applicable to all non-NPT members. So for signing the NPT is one of the mandatory step for any country desirous of joining the NSG.

Countries that opposed India’s NSG membership application during Seoul plenary included China, Russia, Brazil, Austria, New Zealand, Ireland, Mexico and Turkey. To India’s shock, some of the countries that had initially pledged support for its candidature did not do so at the meeting. What surprised many in New Delhi is Mexico and Switzerland’s stand since both countries had promised support during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit a few weeks ago. Brazil was also a surprise since India counted it in its solid support. Turkey took the bold stance by suggesting that applications by Pakistan and India should be clubbed together, which is the way forward.

Indians were quick to engage China at all levels. The latest negotiations took place on September 13; it failed to make any breakthrough on the issue. China made it clear that it would oppose India’s entry into the NSG, unless the cartel opened its door to Pakistan too. China conveyed that it would remain firm on its stand that the NSG should adopt a “two-step approach” to address the issue of admitting new members. They pointed out that China would like the NSG to first “explore” — through “an open and transparent” process — and reach an agreement on a “non-discriminatory formula” to deal with the issue of granting membership to the countries which had not signed the NPT. Once the formula is adopted by the NSG, the cartel should move to the second stage to take up the “country-specific membership issues”, press release issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Chinese government stated.

China has conveyed to India that the issue of the non-NPT states’ participation in the NSG raised “new questions for the group under the new circumstances”. Crux of the question was “how to address the gap between the existing policies and practices of the non-NPT states and the existing international non-proliferation rules and norms”.

Obamas’ predecessor George W Bush, went overboard to sign Indo-US nuclear Agreement 123. In doing so he earned the dubious distinction of setting a global precedence by allowing India to keep eight of its nuclear reactors outside the safe guards of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)—no other country enjoys this luxury. India chose to keep those eight reactors outside safeguards which were suitable for stealing fissile material—heavy water old technology reactors with slow burn time, allowing ore partake. Fissile material from these reactors is sufficient to produce at least 100 nuclear weapons, of Kilo-ton category, per year. Moreover, the US also went along with Indian refusal to accept any safeguards on its ambitious Fast Breeders Programme, nuclear research facilities, and reactors which it may build indigenously—not a distant goal.

Conclusion.

Obama would most likely go down in the history as a dubious leader, who took cover behind the noble cause of global nuclear non-proliferation to perpetuate American nuclear supremacy, and in a crazy quest to contain China, he added to his predecessor’s effort of propping up a nuclear devil—India. Obama’s successor will have a tough task of getting over the nuclear mistrust that Obama has thrust on America. However, it is doable, first step is to un-knot Indo-US nuclear nexus.

About admin

Check Also

Contemporary INGOs: Hegemonic Proxies

When governments abdicate their basic responsibilities towards their people in terms of disaster management, healthcare, education, nutrition etc, the void is filled by NGOs and INGOs, and then host country has to bend backward to accommodate these entities. Hence, it is necessary that beside scrutinizing the INGOs, government of Pakistan takes essential steps to fill the capacity gaps in disaster management, health, education, social security etc.Modern warfare is characterized by calculated ambiguity, controlled chaos and perplexing complexity. It is envisaged that the future hybrid conflict in the region shall be fought by the foreign sponsored non-state actors and inserted proxies under the overall goal of influence operations so as to achieving the strategic end state rather than conventional military to military conflicts. It is no secret that some International Non-government organisations (INGOs) harbour foreign agents working against the interests of the host country with or without the knowledge or complicity of their parent organisation. Such INGOs provide an excellent cover for clandestine activity by hostile foreign agencies such as intelligence-gathering and subversion in the country in which they operate. International organizations and selected NGOs offer diversity of means available for international coercion. Non state actors will continue to play an important role in the future. Due to the technological advancement and globalization, a number of non-state actors and groups, transnational networks and even think tanks have influence against nation states or certain parts of it. Pakistan has asked 18 (INGOs) to wind up their operations within 60 days. During surveillance of these INGOs, it was revealed that they were involved in suspicious activities. They were doing things which were beyond their given mandate. Certain foreign funded organisations which were conducting surveys, were routinely sharing their data with hostile agencies. Some of the INGOs were also operating near sensitive installations.So far 145 INGOs have applied for registration. During scrutiny it was revealed that 63 INGOs are working against Pakistan’s security and solidarity. Ministry of Interior served notices to 49 INGOs (in November 2017 and August 2018) for closing their operation in the country; out of these, 18 filed representation against the decision and they were given ample opportunity to clear their position. Their appeals were unanimously regretted by a special committee constituted for the said purpose. Forty INGOs have not even bothered to get themselves registered and they continue to, work. Legal action against such INGOs is being contemplated.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *